Saying this movie ended "with a martial arts fight" is like saying The Silence of the Lambs ended "with a chase through the house" or that The Shawshank Redemption ended "with a guy breaking out of prison".

__________________The only thing that would have made that movie watchable is if she could lick her own ass. - Josh-da-manFuck you and your whore asshole that Eddie Money wouldn't dare touch. - Solid SnakeI wonder if I would turn invisible if I stick my finger up her ass. - Josh-da-manIf she sneezes and tries to hold it in, will her penis pop back out?- Abob Teff

Someone help me out with the my misogyny claims. There were 3 female leads. The Lieutenant was a solid role and in a position of authority. She got killed by another woman which leads me to Luv. She was a strong henchman and the main big bad of the movie. She was an equal foil to Joe in almost every way. She's killed by the film lead. Joi was also killed by Luv and had a strong role in the film.

__________________

Quote:

"One of the things with the wall is you need transparency," Trump said. "You have to be able to see through it. In other words, if you can't see through that wall  so it could be a steel wall with openings, but you have to have openings because you have to see what's on the other side of the wall."

Saw the movie last night. Thought it was pretty damn good, if not great. A worthy sequel to the original.

I don't know how they expected to make money off this movie. Most of us know the original, but i would guess a lot of people haven't seen it. You really need to know the original to understand what was going on IMHO and the emotional payoffs all derive from the original.

It was long, but I enjoyed spending every second in the Blade Runner universe.

As far as misogny, well thats what you get when two of your main female leads are on their surface, hookers or virtual sex bots. Unfortunate, people can't see beyond that. But we have reached an era when agendas dominate the realities.

Someone help me out with the my misogyny claims. There were 3 female leads. The Lieutenant was a solid role and in a position of authority. She got killed by another woman which leads me to Luv. She was a strong henchman and the main big bad of the movie. She was an equal foil to Joe in almost every way. She's killed by the film lead. Joi was also killed by Luv and had a strong role in the film.

And even a minor one that provides a big revelation.

I guess because Joi is sexbot? And theres some female nudity? And women are killed? A male replicant kills a female replicant? Thats the best I can come up with. If taken out of context like that, sure, sounds like maybe it is misogynistic, but thats just touching on the surface and not really examining the film with real depth.

Because it was something that was established. Not just Wallace but the Replicant uprising. Either that, or it's TWO of the biggest red herrings ever. I really hope that the studio or Ridley, Denis, whomever, come out and say that they were open to the possibilities of more. It's so fucking glaring.

It obviously didn't bother you and that's fine. It bothered me and I still liked the film, but for something like this -- it required resolution.

Didn't need resoluton. Who cares what happens in the uprising. And whether or not Wallace lives or dies, is not the point. Obviously, there will be another Wallace or Tyrell, or whatever.

I don't know what movie you all saw but this movie had a lot of flaws. Perhaps my hopes were too high going in? Here are some random issues I had with it:

Spoiler:

--It was very slow paced and the action was few and far between. I get that K is trying to solve the mystery of the child but in my mind I had decided early early on that it was HIM. The painfully slooww revelation that unfolds is painful to sit through because there was no surprise or twist until the VERY end, at which point I didn't care anymore. I really liked K and had no emotional attachment to the memory engineer.

--K's cyber-girlfriend was annoying. It was a cheap hollow assimilation of a real relationship. It was a sex-toy programmed to chat up the one who bought it. It was as if microsoft sold a companion chat bot that would talk to lonely guys online. One step above Amazon Alexa. Nothing more real than a chat bot that keeps you strung along for whatever reason. She was cute but shallow. I kept thinking of the fake girlfriend from that old Arnold movie 'the 6th day'.

--Plot was lame: Bad guy wants replicants to give birth so he can make an army? Create more replicants cheaply? I thought the WHOLE advantage of a replicant is that you can make them quickly (skip the annoying useless child stage--seriously what are kids good for as slave labor?) and create mass factories that pump out replicants all day long. Having sex/pregnant/give birth seems like a really limiting thing. Rachael died in childbirth anyway. Seems like a waste of time to pursue it.

--The end CLICHE! UGH the boss battle between K and Luv at the end was like every boss battle we've seen:

step 1-shoot each other for awhile.

Step 2- ok bad guy is hurt so I can be distracted and do something else now.

Step 3- Oh no, boss now is engaging in hand to hand combat! Now we can fight again and draw it out. Seriously guys, so many movies follow that fight formula. K is supposedly good at killing replicants, why wouldnt he put more bullets into her to make sure shes dead?

--Ok replicants can drown? They need air? Being a replicant, I don't know, cant they turn off and reboot later? They seem to be invincible when they want to be (burst through walls) and fragile when plot needs it (drown, choke... etc)

--What was with the bees?

--PLOT HOLES: Luv can sneak INTO LAPD headquarters and kill forensic guy and steal bones, without a disguise. THEN she comes BACK WITH SAME OUTFIT ON and kills the chief again with NO security, no cameras, no guards or 1000s of police around? And can spend time browsing her computer.

--Also same with Deckards daughter--- no security in her office at all. Deckard just walks in.

--The Cinematography and effects were good.

Reflected on everything again this weekend. I really did not like the Wallace/evil empire plotline. It was really shallow.

The guy is crazy, ok. He doesn't exude 'genius' as much as he does 'serial killer'. The original Tyrell was so much better.

And again--why would he want robots that can reproduce? It's like samsung wanting reproducing cell phones. Keep 2 Galaxy S8's in a box and soon you'll have a functioning S9? It's so much more inefficient than an assembly line.

And all the insistence that the movie doesn't 'end with a martial arts cliche battle' simply because it ends 15 minutes later? The conflict in the movie ends after the battle. The rest is resolution.

Seriously people chuckled in my theater during the epic fight scene when the camera suddenly cuts to Harrison Ford looking stressed out and futzing about in his seat like a lost senior citizen. It wasnt clear he was TIED to the seat and he just seemed so helpless and silly.

Given all the flaws, the people clamoring to declare it a masterpiece are really just wanting a masterpiece to exist in this years trainwreck of a movie industry.

__________________
This weeks horoscope: While couples who live together often begin to look alike over time, an apartment-wide fire this week will bring about the resemblance in just hours.

Saw this Sunday and loved it. Better than the original?? Hard to say since I don't think there is a way for me to remove the nostalgia factor. I thought they did a brilliant job of progressing the world from Blade Runner. Nothing huge from technology standpoint, but a natural, slight evolution. Cinematography was top notch with some really beautiful imagery.

I thought the performances were solid top to bottom. I like how there wasn't really a true "bad guy" in that you could see the point of view of each group and why they did/thought what they did. It was interesting to see that the meeting of Deckard and Rachel was implied to be intentional. If you take it at face value, it really changes how you look at Blade Runner. I didn't think they would come close to being able to recreate that world, much less the feel...but I was wrong. I'll have to catch this in theaters at least once more.

__________________
Ruler of all that I survey...and that ain't much!WiiU ID: ButrzRulzXbox ID: ButrzRulzPSN ID: ButrzRulz

Wasn't the point of Joi that she wasn't just a hooker bot but something far more?

I would agree with you if there were some REASON to believe this. All that is shown is that she is an off the shelf sex girl. NO modifications or reason for her personality except that she is behaving exactly as programmed. I think they even hammer it home a few times. Luv, says twice something like 'I'm glad you like our product', and another time when the giant sex girl calls him joe. Its like 'wake up, you've been played'.

The girl was a branded product that was in no way supposed to be unique. It played him because it was programmed to, not even to mention how it could have been hacked for information the whole time (until the antenna broke?).

__________________
This weeks horoscope: While couples who live together often begin to look alike over time, an apartment-wide fire this week will bring about the resemblance in just hours.

I think it was poorly written in this regard. If they wanted it to be a true ai, they should have given it a reason.

All they show and indicate is that she's off the shelf. She acts so hollow in the beginning too: Pretending the food is real, acting like june cleaver.

In the movie 'Her' they take you through the change that the ai makes: She explains how she is deciding to do things differently. She takes cues from the guy and changes her makeup that then cascades into the whole populace of the movie who bought the same ai---that was revolutionary within the story, the ai awakening was the revolution.

With Blade Runner 2049, she's a side story and they don't put time into why this ai--that is presumably a big seller--is different with K. Surely other replicants use one?

__________________
This weeks horoscope: While couples who live together often begin to look alike over time, an apartment-wide fire this week will bring about the resemblance in just hours.

I think they even hammer it home a few times. Luv, says twice something like 'I'm glad you like our product', and another time when the giant sex girl calls him joe. Its like 'wake up, you've been played'.

That's the one that got me. I thought she was more than what she was programmed to be but then when the giant advertisement said Joe I was taken aback. Although I think that's a positive to the character and not a negative. Whether it was written to try and be ambiguous or that's how she played it I thought it was perfect.

__________________

Quote:

"One of the things with the wall is you need transparency," Trump said. "You have to be able to see through it. In other words, if you can't see through that wall  so it could be a steel wall with openings, but you have to have openings because you have to see what's on the other side of the wall."

I think it was poorly written in this regard. If they wanted it to be a true ai, they should have given it a reason.

All they show and indicate is that she's off the shelf. She acts so hollow in the beginning too: Pretending the food is real, acting like june cleaver

She wasn't new at this point. She was doing what K likes. He like Sinatra too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Save Ferris

In the movie 'Her' they take you through the change that the ai makes: She explains how she is deciding to do things differently. She takes cues from the guy and changes her makeup that then cascades into the whole populace of the movie who bought the same ai---that was revolutionary within the story, the ai awakening was the revolution.

Yeah, they held the viewers hand and baby stepped them through it.

A side story is all she needed to be. A side story can raise tons of questions and themes.

That's the one that got me. I thought she was more than what she was programmed to be but then when the giant advertisement said Joe I was taken aback. Although I think that's a positive to the character and not a negative. Whether it was written to try and be ambiguous or that's how she played it I thought it was perfect.

I think a lot of you got taken in -- even in the beginning, they pause the fucking pretend makeout for a phone call! How much warning do you need that the stupid thing is potentially bugged?

It is an exact future representation of a chat bot.

They have 'sex dolls' that can have actual sex in the blade runner universe, with artifical intelligence too--Im surprised they took a step back technologically to pretend that 'aw gee shes so hot and says all the right things but you cant have actual sex with her'

If K had more money would he have purchased a real sex replicant?

__________________
This weeks horoscope: While couples who live together often begin to look alike over time, an apartment-wide fire this week will bring about the resemblance in just hours.

No just listened to comments on the way out, and people were derisively negative. Not intelligent negative like here, but "that sucked" "i want my 3 hours bacl", "how does this get good reviews" type of negative.

Didn't need resoluton. Who cares what happens in the uprising. And whether or not Wallace lives or dies, is not the point. Obviously, there will be another Wallace or Tyrell, or whatever.

They should have kept them in the background and just alluded to them instead of actually showing them doing and plotting things. It went from having an explicit meaning to an implicit meaning by the end -- which didn't seem to be the point considering Wallace was pulling the strings and was shown doing these things along with introducing the leader of the resistance and what they were up to. Hell, even what's her face melded with Joi to gather recon. Why go through all that and not have a pay off? Fuck this being just about K. The film was 2 hrs 45mins long -- the whole movie revolved around him.

To me, it was sloppy and didn't feel earned, because the bigger battle/war is still to come.

No just listened to comments on the way out, and people were derisively negative. Not intelligent negative like here, but "that sucked" "i want my 3 hours bacl", "how does this get good reviews" type of negative.

They should have kept them in the background and just alluded to them instead of actually showing them doing and plotting things. It went from having an explicit meaning to an implicit meaning by the end -- which didn't seem to be the point considering Wallace was pulling the strings and was shown doing these things along with introducing the leader of the resistance and what they were up to. Hell, even what's her face melded with Joi to gather recon. Why go through all that and not have a pay off? Fuck this being just about K. The film was 2 hrs 45mins long -- the whole movie revolved around him.

To me, it was sloppy and didn't feel earned, because the bigger battle/war is still to come.

Remember how she acted when she could first walk without the hardware on the ceiling? Remember the look of wonder in her eyes?

Was she really feeling emotion? Did she think she was?

A replicant is just a chat bot with a body, right?

I couldn't get past the thought that she was just a pawn linked to the big corporation. They gave the few subtle warning signs. I never cared for her as a character and I kept waiting for her betrayal.

The 'wonder in her eyes' was fine but she had no skin. I couldn't believe she was anything more than faking her whole existence. A replicant by design is more susceptible to the human condition and independent thought (rebellion) because it is so much closer to human: Skin, eyes, heartbeat, genitals.

The theme from the original Blade Runner is that when you make something so human, you get the added results of surprising human behavior.

The virtual girlfriend in BR 2049 is so much further removed from the human experince. Shes more computer than human because of her limited input and lack of 'fleshy' hardware.

__________________
This weeks horoscope: While couples who live together often begin to look alike over time, an apartment-wide fire this week will bring about the resemblance in just hours.

The virtual girlfriend in BR 2049 is so much further removed from the human experince. Shes more computer than human because of her limited input and lack of 'fleshy' hardware.

Why, because of the tactile experience? She was a program hooked to a house maintenance machine. She sure seemed determined to get a sense of the tactile world when she invited the whore over. Her voice even had a bit of venom and yearning to it when she told the whore that she was trying to sync.

It is odd how easily you desire to just throw that off to the side as nothing.